William Lupton <wlup...@broadband-forum.org> wrote: > Thanks for the clarifications. A few follow-ups below. Cheers, W. > > >> a. Extending a "when" statement so it is true for a wider set of > >> conditions (example: realising that an RFC 7223 interface object > >> applies to additional interface types). > > > > This is allowed by: > > > > o A "when" statement may be removed or its constraint relaxed. > > OK. I see this for "must" but not for "when"; in 08 I can find only > one instance of "relax".
Aha, I was looking at the upcomign -09 - this was already pointed out by Andy and fixed. Sorry for the confusion. > >> c. Converting a leaf node to a choice (with no change to default > >> behaviour). > > > > This is not allowed, but maybe it should. I.e., it should be ok to > > wrap a node that is not a mandatory node (see terminology) in a choice > > (+ case). > > OK. Maybe this already happened but perhaps it would be worth checking > whether there are any other cases that could/should be included (given > that the list is exhaustive)? Yes, this is why we need reviewers, so thanks for spotting this! > > A container cannot be mandatory. > > OK! I should have phrased it more loosely. But you answered the basic > question, which was whether listing the submodules is REQUIRED. Yes it > is. /martin _______________________________________________ netmod mailing list netmod@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
